T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
429.1 | Your best source of information | CADSYS::BOLIO::BENOIT | | Thu Mar 25 1993 15:45 | 14 |
| Is at the library. See if your local library carries Morningstar. If so, the
loads and phone numbers for each fund are clearly listed. The is another
publication that my library carries called the guide to no-load mutual funds. If
you decide on professional advice be careful, and be prepared to pay for it.
There are some very good notes on questions to ask a financial planner. I don't
use a planner, I prefer to do it myself. I'd hesitate to recommend individual
funds as what is right for me, may not be for you (risk taker, conservative, etc).
If, however, you are recommended a fund, or find one yourself that you think
looks good, I'd be happy to look up any information I can find about it. I can
list the funds I have with the disclaimer that I call myself an above average
risk taker, if that would help you. Bottom line is what you feel comfortable
with.
Michael
|
429.2 | I hope you got tax advice on that ownership shift! | TLE::JBISHOP | | Thu Mar 25 1993 15:52 | 11 |
| I'm afraid the only honest, etc. individual most of us have found
is our own selves. But at least we're cheap and there's no question
of duplicity!
Go to the local library and scan the latest issues of Money, the
(August?) issue of Forbes with the mutual fund focus, etc. Read.
Call up funds that look interesting and request a prospectus. Read.
Look for articles and reference books, etc. Then make your best
guess.
-John Bishop
|
429.3 | OR..... | CADSYS::BOLIO::BENOIT | | Thu Mar 25 1993 15:55 | 3 |
| use the old dart method.....even Peter Lynch admits to that trick a few times.
michael
|
429.4 | | SLEKE::MCCOY | | Thu Mar 25 1993 16:07 | 13 |
|
RE .2 Before my wife is added, we will be getting tax advice. From
what I've determined so far, it would appear we pay no gift
tax unless we take something out. The way around this, in
my eye, is to have my mother-in-law take it out, since she's
on the account, and will be paying less taxes on capital
gains. We don't expect to touch anything for at least three
years.
I will be stopping in at the library. Thanks.
-Tim
|
429.5 | I believe that the only way to avoid the taxes on this one | CADSYS::BOLIO::BENOIT | | Thu Mar 25 1993 16:09 | 5 |
| Is to have your mother-in-law give you each $10,000 a year ($20,000 total) until
the entire amount is transfered to you. Otherwise there will be a give tax at
some time ( or sorry to say ) an estate tax.
michael
|
429.6 | AAII | DPDMAI::VETEIKIS | | Thu Mar 25 1993 21:08 | 11 |
| Tim,
If you do decide to do-it-yourself, I recommend you consider joining
the American Association of Individual Investors. They publish a
monthly periodical that has very insightful articles about the
"investment world." With your subscription, you also get their no-load
mutual fund directory. Its very helpful in picking no-loads, with
minimum investment info, phone numbers, historical performace,
investment strategy, etc...
Curt
|
429.7 | Consider fidelity ... | VMSDEV::KRIEGER | Think positive, make a difference every day | Fri Mar 26 1993 07:15 | 21 |
|
4.5% load funds returning less than 10% / year sounds almost criminal
to me ... sounds like some broker was/is making lots of money.
May I suggest Fidelity. They have plenty of no load funds that have
returns over EACH of the last few years and LIFE of the funds over 10%.
Fidelity has a Mutual Fund Guide - monthly and quarterly. You can look
at them in there offices or get a subscription. They list funds
performance, objectives, risks, manager, where and what the fund has
for holdings etc, etc ... The fidelity people will not give you as much
advice as Shearson but will show you the options - go in state what
your goals are, what risks you are willing to take etc, etc,...
I personally have been very happy with Equity Income II. 19.2 % last
year. 5 or 6% allready this year. NO LOAD.
works for me - your mileage may vary. If you want to look at a mutual
fund guide - I usually have one in my office at ZKO ...
jim krieger
|
429.8 | Be careful with Int'l bond funds. | SOLVIT::CHEN | | Fri Mar 26 1993 09:05 | 7 |
| re: .0
One word of caution about investing in international bond funds. Your
return will be very senstive to the dollar exchange rate. This may
force you to take on more risk than you actually wanted to.
Mike
|
429.9 | Drop Sharson | VMSDEV::HAMMOND | Charlie Hammond -- ZKO3-04/S23 -- dtn 381-2684 | Fri Mar 26 1993 11:20 | 20 |
| > I have been investing with Shearson-Lehman-Hutton in Manchester ...
> I am looking for alternatives for our investments. Shearson has
> suggested a well diversified portfolio that includes 4.5% loaded
> mutual funds. They do not sell no-load. ...
Tim --
It is quite clear from your questions in the base note that you
are far to intelligent and knowledgeble to by be paying Seharson a
4.5% commission for advise that is limited to the load-funds they
offer.
I suggest that in an orderly fashion over the next 2-6 months 100%
of this money should be transfered to no-load funds. You can deal
directly with the funds -- for this purpose some of the larger
families of no-load funds, such as T R Price, are recommended. You
could also choose one of the discount brokerage houses that deal
in no-load funds with little or no transaction fees, such as
Charles Schwab.
|
429.10 | You might as well start the easy way | NOVA::FINNERTY | Sell high, buy low | Fri Mar 26 1993 12:25 | 28 |
|
You may not know that only about 20% or so of fund managers outperform
the S&P 500 index. If past is prelude, you can immediately put
yourself near the head of the pack by allocating a large percentage of
your long term holdings to a no-load, low-overhead index fund. The
remainder can be invested into other asset classes to diversify some of
the risk away and help ensure that the bad times aren't so bad.
Or you could allocate, say, 80% or 90% to that kind of strategy, and
then pursue a more active stragegy with the remaining 10%-20%. If you
can prove to yourself over time that the active portfolio does better,
then you can change your weightings.
Note also that your specific patterns of consumption affect how you
might hedge your future... if you own some expensive real estate, you
might want to hedge against a drop in real estate valuations. If it's
possible to hedge against rising college costs, you might want to think
about how you might do that (I should think more about this for my own
sake, as a matter of fact).
Anyway, the index funds have done very well in the past, and are
essentially a no-brainer. If you invest gradually (e.g. dollar cost
average), you'll be at less risk of losing your capital in a sudden
market drop, and you should be able to enjoy good long term return.
/Jim
|
429.11 | See note 363 if interest in Fidelity | FREEBE::NEARY | Bob Neary | Fri Mar 26 1993 13:30 | 1 |
|
|
429.12 | | ZENDIA::SCHOTT | | Mon Mar 29 1993 11:30 | 7 |
| If you eliminate all loaded funds from your choices, then you
are eliminating some of the best fund managers in the business.
I'd rather base my decision on performance. (The loaded funds
I've looked into have breakpoints which reduce the load as your
account grows.) Management fees and 12-b1's and who know what
other charges they'll add scare me. No one works for free.
I thought Fidelity has a lot of 3% loaded funds?
|
429.13 | | VMSDEV::HAMMOND | Charlie Hammond -- ZKO3-04/S23 -- dtn 381-2684 | Mon Mar 29 1993 13:54 | 29 |
| re: .12
> If you eliminate all loaded funds from your choices, then you
> are eliminating some of the best fund managers in the business.
True as stated, but don't forget that for almost every good LOADED
fund there is an equally good NOLOAD fund. The noload fund is a
better investement.
> ... No one works for free.
> I thought Fidelity has a lot of 3% loaded funds?
I suppose this is also true as stated. Yes, you always pay a
management fee, and it is good to prefer funds with lower
management fees compared to similar types of funds. But the load
fees are SALES COMMISSIONS. They don't go to the fund, they don't
go to the management company, and they surely never go back to
you. They go to pay the salesperson who sells you the fund. You DO
NOT NEED the salesperson's "services"�, so I suggest that the fact
that a salesperson won't work for free is not relevant.
If you DO need or want an advisor, find one who works on a fee for
services basis, rather than on commission. That way you'll avoid a
conflict of interest and know exactly who much you're paying and
for what.
------------------------------------------------------------------
� It is suggested by people with experience that mutual fund
salespeople steer their clients wrong as often as not.
|
429.14 | | SOLVIT::REDZIN::DCOX | | Mon Mar 29 1993 15:39 | 30 |
| re: .12
> If you eliminate all loaded funds from your choices, then you
> are eliminating some of the best fund managers in the business.
If you review frequently published analyses of mutual funds' performances
(based on NET profit - what you take out less what you put in), you quickly
come to the conclusion that the pundits are right, the S&P unmanaged index has
a better performance record than the vast majority of mutual funds - the record
is disproportionately higher when looking at just loaded funds. Perhaps
the measure of "best" is based on GROSS, not NET ROI.
If an investor feels obligated to give a fund manager 3%-8% commission for
underperforming an UNMANAGED index, well I guess we all spend our money
differently.
Of course, you can still find a couple or few funds that are loaded and still
provide a better_than_most NET ROI. Unfortunately, they seldom exhibit that
characteristic year after year. Even the mighty Magellan trails many, many
no-load Fidelity funds. If you dwell on getting the most out of your load, the
question becomes one of knowing when to get out as the fund starts performing
poorly. And, since you are redeeming and buying, you are adding more
commissions to the debit side of your ROI calculations. And that puts you
into the arena of timing the effects of macro market swings on individual funds.
And if your are any good at that, you stopped reading around or about my
second sentence.
FWIW,
Dave
|
429.15 | So what do you think? | CPDW::ROSCH | | Tue Mar 30 1993 11:30 | 5 |
| I keep getting this voice inside me saying to invest in Drug, Europe
and Real Estate mutual funds. The rational is that they appear to have
bottomed. I'll treat this as a GROWTH catagory which is where I want to
invest for the long term.
What's your little voice telling you?
|
429.16 | for what it's worth | ASDG::MISTRY | | Tue Mar 30 1993 11:32 | 5 |
|
Still too early for drugs; about right for europe.
Kaizad
|
429.17 | International Yes, Utilities Maybe.. | SLEKE::MCCOY | | Tue Mar 30 1993 13:43 | 5 |
|
I've been hearing that international is a good direction, specifically
in utilities... the only glitch would be if congress does not approve
the N. American Free Trade act... That seems doubtful though..
|
429.18 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Wed Mar 31 1993 04:22 | 17 |
|
Europe is very iffy at the moment - my viewpoint.
The german discont and repro rate may be cut tomorrow, UK navy has
threatened to shoot at the French if they enter our 6 mile exclusion
zone, they are burning our fish.
Germany has just started going into a recession, and may take the French
with them, as they tie themselves closely together.
The UK may be getting out of recovery, but can't ignore the impact
of the rest of the EEC.
I would wait-and-see until at least the exchange rates steady a bit
more.
Heather
|